Re: table usage (was Re: text on graphics?)

Abigail (abigail@tungsten.gn.iaf.nl)
Sat, 11 May 1996 18:02:06 +0200 (MET DST)


From: Abigail <abigail@tungsten.gn.iaf.nl>
Message-Id: <199605111602.SAA21912@tungsten.gn.iaf.nl>
Subject: Re: table usage (was Re: text on graphics?)
To: www-html@w3.org
Date: Sat, 11 May 1996 18:02:06 +0200 (MET DST)
In-Reply-To: <v02140b03adba049cd4fb@[205.149.180.135]> from "Walter Ian Kaye" at May 11, 96 01:59:58 am

Walter Ian Kaye wrote:
++ 
++ At 5:09a 05/11/96, Abigail wrote:
++ >Most of the time, <table> is just used to layout the web page. This
++ >works quite well when using a graphical browser. However, if the
++ >user (= reader) does something the developer (= author) has never
++ >dreamed off (say, using a sound browser), things can lead to sillyness.
++ ><table>s were designed for tabular data.  If they are misused to force
++ >a graphical layout, one limits his/her audience.
++ 
++ If "<table>s were designed for tabular data", then ROWSPAN and COLSPAN
++ would not be allowed. These attributes are in direct contradiction to
++ your view of what is "appropriate" for <table>s. Do you favor deprecation
++ of these attributes?

I fail to see why rowspan and colspan contradict that tables are for
tabular data.
The first example of the latest table draft seems perfectly valid to me.

Abigail